Murray is far better on clay than Sampras ever was (I've seen a few of his matches on clay and he was awful). Andy would thrash him, or at least win in straights.

Agreed, Murray's return would be more effective v Sampras on hard. In fact I'll be honest Murray's return is perfect against Sampras full stop. But Sampras would win 2 sets, His serve and forehand were dangerous on any surface.

Agreed, Murray's return would be more effective v Sampras on hard. In fact I'll be honest Murray's return is perfect against Sampras full stop. But Sampras would win 2 sets, His serve and forehand were dangerous on any surface.

Sampras v Murray at 2005 USO surface would be great.

On hardcourt, Andy would win most encounter with difficulty. On grass, we all know who wins. On clay, Andy thrashes Sampras.

Sampras won Rome on slow clay. Come back to me when Mandy wins a clay masters title. The guy is one of the biggest clay clowns I have ever seen, given his movement. He plays on clay like it's hard court. Simply awful.

Best player on clay you'd compare him to would be Hewitt- similar games, similar deficiencies on the surface. Decent results, but not going to be threatening the big guns.

Hewitt was actually very close to beating Nadal on clay in 2007 and plays a lot differently to Murray - Hewitt hits on the rise, hits a better slice, hits a flatter ball and can change directions pretty well. Murray doesn't take the ball as consistently early as Hewitt and his point construction is a lot more different than Hewitt.

Sampras won Rome on slow clay. Come back to me when Mandy wins a clay masters title. The guy is one of the biggest clay clowns I have ever seen, given his movement. He plays on clay like it's hard court. Simply awful.

Did you even watch that tournament? It was playing ultrafast, just because some nostalgitards repeat over and over again that clay was slower back then doesnt mean it was always the case. What next, you are going to say RG 96 and 99 was slow?

Give me a break, the final between Becker and Sampras didnt resemble claycourt tennis in any way.

__________________All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.

Did you even watch that tournament? It was playing ultrafast, just because some nostalgitards repeat over and over again that clay was slower back then doesnt mean it was always the case. What next, you are going to say RG 96 and 99 was slow?

Give me a break, the final between Becker and Sampras didnt resemble claycourt tennis in any way.

Madrid plays faster than some hard courts today, certainly faster than Rome back then and Mugray still fails there, what is your point? My comment wasn't meant to praise Sampras' clay prowess, anyway. It was a response to the delusional kid who thinks Mandy would "destroy" Pete on clay in straights.